No politics

No politics until further notice. Honeymoon to consider. New wife to keep happy. Sorry..

UPDATE

After discussions, I now feel free to speak my mind. So I shall. When we return to Melbourne. I apologise for the mysteriousness, but I did not want to act in anger or before matters had been resolved. I had to be fair to my employer and to my reader, and I apologise if you think I’ve had the balance wrong over the past 24 hours.

Thank you to everyone who has rung, emailed or commented on this post, here and whilst listening to the radio.

About these ads

25 responses to “No politics

  1. WHAT ARE WE PAYING YOU FOR!?!?

  2. I hope he does not get bogged down in thinking. It will be a new experience for Bolt, to think before he writes.

    It is not fair when you have to stick to the truth and facts, makes the jopb hard.

  3. Take your time Jeremy. I suspect Splatterbottom is beside himself with nothing much to fill in his time. Separation anxiety can be a terrible thing.

  4. LOL

    Touche, even

    Hope Bolt has an epiphany… but not holding my breath

  5. As someone pointed out on twitter, it would’ve been an amazing wedding present.

  6. Splatterbottom

    Bolt’s epiphany was that he should question his employer when they are too quick to cave in to the PM’s petulant demands. Good on him!

  7. narcoticmusing

    Has anyone noticed the irony that Bolt’s article about silencing free speech had no capacity to comment…

    While in principle, I certainly agree that free speech should not bow to political pressure or other, I also believe people should not have thier rights violated – such as, say, via defamation and insinuation of lies – just for a corporation to make a buck. There was no public interest, just profit interest.

  8. Splatterbottom

    Narcotic, I would like to know why Gillard seems to have a soft spot for union crooks. She may have been “young and naïve” as a partner at a powerful law firm, but how do you explain the fact that she has “full confidence” in Thomson who apparently is doing a “good job” which she hopes he will continue to do for a “long, long, long time to come”? She isn’t young anymore and her naïveté looks more like a last cynical attempt to cling to power.

  9. “Narcotic, I would like to know why Gillard seems to have a soft spot for union crooks.”

    Oh, FFS. Really, SB? I thought you were better than that sort of vacuous smear.

    “She may have been “young and naïve” as a partner at a powerful law firm”

    Nice attempt to conflate – the “young and naive” was about her doomed romantic relationship.

    News Ltd concedes that she didn’t know anything about any wrongdoing. It concedes that there’s nothing she should’ve known, either. So what precisely is the point of this smear, apart from a nasty dogwhistle to people who they know will absorb it despite the “we’re not saying this” caveat.

    It’s pretty repulsive stuff – it’s a dishonest, feral game that has no place being published by a supposedly reputable news organisation.

    “how do you explain the fact that she has “full confidence” in Thomson who apparently is doing a “good job” which she hopes he will continue to do for a “long, long, long time to come”?”

    Has anyone alleged that he isn’t? On what grounds? All I’ve heard is an untested allegation about conduct long before he was an MP.

  10. Splatterbottom

    Jeremy these two episodes raise questions about Gillard’s judgment. One of the first things they teach you at law school is never to take instructions in the nude!

    As to Thomson, the public needs to hear from him. It needs to know why the ALP paid so much money to pay off his debts.

    Gillard is at best accident prone. She did not need to be so vigorous in support of Thomson. She should just say that she won’t take action against him because she is beholden to him for her position as PM. Sadly she doesn’t seem to have learned the basic lesson from the AWU scandal: if you lie down with dogs you get fleas.

    BTW if want a laugh tell me if you think there is a connection between this story and this opinion piece.

  11. “Jeremy these two episodes raise questions about Gillard’s judgment.”

    How? What should she have done differently? Why?

    “One of the first things they teach you at law school is never to take instructions in the nude!”

    Who’s making the allegation that she did? Are you? On what evidence?

    See, one of the things that highlights how hollow this smear is, is how often its proponents have to resort to making stuff up.

    “Gillard is at best accident prone.”

    What, because there’s a “scandal” involving a government MP? OMG. That certainly doesn’t happen to every single PM.

    “She did not need to be so vigorous in support of Thomson. She should just say that she won’t take action against him because she is beholden to him for her position as PM.”

    Why? To give News Ltd a free kick?

    “Sadly she doesn’t seem to have learned the basic lesson from the AWU scandal: if you lie down with dogs you get fleas.”

    What fleas? And are you saying that she’s “lain down with dogs” by being leader of one of the big two parties – the ones that regularly turn out dodgy MPs, but which in our present electoral system are the only ones allowed to form government?

    What should she have done? I love this line from the right that if only Gillard committed political suicide and disintegrated her government then they wouldn’t mind her so much. How big of them.

    “BTW if want a laugh tell me if you think there is a connection between this story and this opinion piece.”

    And yet in Australia today, they’d be allowed to get married and raise kids, despite the obvious damage that would come from having such parents. Where’s the Australian Family Lobby when it’s needed?

  12. narcoticmusing

    Welcome back Mr J :)

    SB, interesting that you think Thomson should answer to unsubstantiated claims against him and that his party should not stand by him to assist in defending such claims. If he is guilty, then there are measures in the Constittuion to deal with that proportional to the offence. What is your issue? Is it the same as Abbot? A man who dispises democracy because he is willing to destroy Australia and its reputation in order to win a government that he did not win through democratic process? (and like it or not, in a hung parliament, the independents were the democratic process).

  13. Splatterbottom

    Some questions about judgment:

    Why did Gillard set up the fund with only one signatory? Her duty was to the AWU and this would normally involve having two signatories on all accounts.

    Did she notice that her lover was suddenly flush with cash?

    Where did the money come from for the renovations and clothes?

    Is it sensible to continue taking instructions from a lover?

    “Why? To give News Ltd a free kick?”

    No. To tell the truth. I know that is a novel concept in the current political environment, but is it any wonder that people are so cynical about their politicians?

  14. narcoticmusing

    LMAO – ‘to tell the truth’ in defence of an article the Australian admitted was a lie? In defence of a party whose leader said don’t believe anything i say if it isn’t written down?

    There is NO public interest here – it is simply profit motivation and yet more proof of absolute bias in the right wing media that they would lie about the PM, not even attempt to check it – and then allow Bolt to publish more innuendo and pretend to be a victim (despite that he is very quick to threaten others with defamation suits if the like treatment is handed to him).
    The definition of truth and free speech to people like A. Bolt = “if you criticise, disagree or in anyway produce negative press about my opinion you are damning free speech, but i can lie my pants off and ruin people’s lives and that is ok’

    So I suppose it is ok if I say Bolt is a racist myonginist facist – it is only opinion, but you know, I do have a really awesome contact who knows some stuff…
    S

  15. Splatterbottom

    Narcotic: “Thomson should answer to unsubstantiated claims against him and that his party should not stand by him to assist in defending such claims.”

    The problem for Thomson is that the claims are substantiated – by receipts, signatures drivers license bank statements and phone records. He had ample opportunity to put on an affidavit in reply but sadly he withdrew proceedings before he went under oath. Funny that the ALP couldn’t have lent him a smaller amount of money to complete his case and take the stand isn’t it?

    I wonder why Thomson doesn’t explain this:

    Finally, Abbott is just doing his job pointing out the never-ending trail of incompetence and sleaze this hideous government leaves in its wake as it trashes the country. Somebody has to point this out. Lord knows neither Gillard’s fanbois nor the Greens who are giving her her riding orders will do so.

    The real stinking turd in the room is the imposition of the carbon (dioxide) by deceit, against the wishes of the majority of voters. Ow that is a serious attack on democracy. Acting like a proper opposition is the very embodiment of democratic process.

  16. “The problem for Thomson is that the claims are substantiated – by receipts, signatures drivers license bank statements and phone records.

    That’s not substantiating the allegation he’s committed a crime. That’s for the courts to decide.

    In any case, the Liberals have their own MPs who’ve allegedly committed crimes, and they haven’t kicked them out – so their Thomson faux outrage is spectacularly hypocritical.

    “Finally, Abbott is just doing his job pointing out the never-ending trail of incompetence and sleaze this hideous government leaves in its wake as it trashes the country. Somebody has to point this out. “

    What incompetence and sleaze? If the Thomson thing – allegations from before he was even an MP – is the best thing they’ve got to hang this government on, then it must be doing a pretty good job, eh?

    It is, except for in the areas where it does what the Right demands – eg promising no carbon tax, eg deporting refugees to Malaysia. They keep falling down when they do dumb things like that.

    “Lord knows neither Gillard’s fanbois nor the Greens who are giving her her riding orders will do so.”

    If the Greens are giving “her her riding orders”, why is so much ALP policy right-wing? Why the Malaysia “solution”? Why the opposition to marriage equality?

    “The real stinking turd in the room is the imposition of the carbon (dioxide) by deceit, against the wishes of the majority of voters. Ow that is a serious attack on democracy.”

    I think you’ve got that the wrong way round. It’s the abandonment of an ETS by the Liberal Party in 2009 against the wishes of its voters after going to the 2007 election with such a policy that was an attack on democracy.

    (The ALP promised a carbon price and the carbon “tax” is a temporary step to getting there, necessitated for them by not winning majority government.)

    And let’s not get started on the massive and corrupt collusion by corporate Australia over the RSPT that brought down the Rudd government.

  17. “The real stinking turd in the room is the imposition of the *WorkChoices* by deceit, against the wishes of the majority of voters.”

    There – fixed that for you. If a majority of voters want to get rid of this government for the carbon price then they will have their chance in 2 years time. That’s how the game works.

    And yes, WorkChoices was brought in by actual deceit, not imagined. I remember watching the returns on election night and seeing Liberal ministers saying “Now we have a mandate to change industrial relations” and thinking “When did that ever get discussed during the election campaign?”. In fact it never came up until after Howard got a workable majority in both houses.

  18. Splatterbottom

    Jeremy you should go back to enjoying your honeymoon. I won’t make another comment till you return, no matter what the provocation from Narcotic.

  19. “Jeremy these two episodes raise questions about Gillard’s judgment. One of the first things they teach you at law school is never to take instructions in the nude!” – SB

    Lower than a snake’s belly in a wheel rut.

  20. And hasn’t it been enjoyable to see the conservative principle of personal responsibility so wonderfully enacted?

    Bolt – everything is everyone else’s fault

  21. I won’t make another comment till you return, no matter what the provocation from Narcotic.

    Perhaps in the meantime you could take the opportunity to look at some non-News Ltd for some information so that when you return to commenting you’ll have something other than tired old right-wing talking points to contribute.

  22. narcoticmusing

    Buns – I just find it amusing that SB has used the conservative principle of personal responsibility mentioned by nawagadj so well. Suddenly it is my fault he commented! This is despite that he commented first and I merely replied to his comment and that my comment partly agreed with his… but of course I was just provoking him, it couldn’t be that someone actually has a different view than him – I am sure that first comment of his was some sort of psychic premonition that I would comment and thus my fault too.

  23. On the one hand, Jeremy could make his honeymoon permanent so that SB’s semi-imposed exile never ends … On the other hand I have missed the slugfests, the hypocracises, the fallacies, and the sheer insanity of SB’s contributions to the blog under normal operating conditions.

  24. I’m willing to bet that Sear returns from said honeymoon having grown a beard. Anyone willing to wager?

    Also willing to lay bets on how long said beard will last on said face.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s